QLD. From the news - Gee, there getting serious about the road toll.

[Keepleft]

Tired and cranky. Same old expected outcomes with no genuine positive possibilities, Zzzzzzzz.

http://au.rd.yahoo.com/news/prev/*ht...1/21/xey5.html

[Deadman]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

Tired and cranky. Same old expected outcomes with no genuine positive possibilities, Zzzzzzzz.

exactly :

[WizBang]

Yes ,so make sure the driver has his brains on him and their leave them on the footpath ,LOL

[flappist]

Yep premier pete, man of vision........

The results ARE:-

Increased speeding fines.
Introduction of fixed cameras.
Lots of other things that increase government income.

NO REDUCTION IN ROAD DEATHS

Example of QLD labor stupidity......

Many backpackers are hurt & killed travelling to and on Fraser Island in 4WDs.
The majority of backbackers are from europe where they have only ever seen pictures of 4WDs in books and normally drive on the other side of the road.
The launch off in grossly overloaded vehicles with low tyre pressure (for the sand) and lurch about all over the road barely in control.

Some time ago it was suggested that if each group had someone driving who has local experience in 4WDs that there would be less accidents and a few jobs created.

Beattie's dickbrained flunkies prohibited this because if there was a guide or driver then it would be a commercial tour not a "self drive" and they had a policy of no more commercial tours.

They would rather kill people than go against party dogma.

This is not made up, I live here and see this daily.

You think that a mob that are this short sighted will come up with a viable solution? Yeh right.......

[SpoolMan]

Lets not make this thread political, or it will have to go..
.
could try and put up some idea's on how we think the road toll can be cut...

[flappist]

Originally Posted by XRFPV8

Lets not make this thread political, or it will have to go..
.
could try and put up some idea's on how we think the road toll can be cut...

Ok Mark, sorry about the labor slant, but the thread did start with premier pete's statement and he IS the labor premier of QLD.

If you can please change my "labor" to "government" if it will comply with the TOC.

[Keepleft]

You sure this is appropriate? - political debate in relation to roads, cars and transport matters is surely feasible, certainly lawful. If people get heated about a serving government, or opposition, it's relevant Minister or Premier as our elected representatives the people, then we should be free to discuss this, provided the feedback does not contravene a law.

We fought WW2 over the right of freedom of expression, from tyranny and prohibitionists.

If Joe Zipperari calls Premier Bloggs a pea-brained gallah, then that is purely Bloggs 'opinion', not illegal, and we should support his right to say it, even if as individuals we don't agree with the particular statement. If on the other hand a person threatens by way of incitement that we should all go and kill premier Bloggs with stale softdrink and ham, then that *could* be an offence if you follow.


In fact, I've sent correspondence off tonight, it might or might not get me summonsed to QLD Parliament. That said, this discussion is absolutely inherently political, this cannot be avoided in the subject matter as all sides of the political spectrum have an input, its just that sometimes one is actually better than the other/s, even if only for a few years.



I suggest QLD hand its transport functions to NSW, we could then improve things:-)

[SpoolMan]

Originally Posted by flappist

Example of QLD labor stupidity......

Beattie's dickbrained
They would rather kill people than go against party dogma.

Originally Posted by flappist

Ok Mark, sorry about the labor slant, but the thread did start with premier pete's statement and he IS the labor premier of QLD.

If you can please change my "labor" to "government" if it will comply with the TOC.

Its easy to throw a bit at any political party, it takes one person who disagrees with your chioce of words on that party and the thread is lost in a politics battle then its gone.
Sometimes it would be good if we could see some idea's and genuine solutions.
Back to thread topic.

[Blue Oval Mopar Man]

Originally Posted by XRFPV8

Lets not make this thread political, or it will have to go..
.
could try and put up some idea's on how we think the road toll can be cut...

What do you mean , not make it political ? Thats exactly where the problem lays !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! These so called leaders of our great country dont give 2 shytes about the road toll , other than to use it as an excuse to raise their efforts in revenue raising !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! they will never take the hard option of fixing the real reasons behind the toll when there are softer more financialy better options like getting more money out of the already struggling people and making it "LOOK " like they are targeting the road toll !

[Madhatter]

you cant just blame labour for that stance, the whole country is backward. European countries are coming out with reports which show that speed isnt the largest cause of accidents and that higher road speeds dont lead to an increase in fatalities. Difference is in these places you actually have to learn about your vehicle and how to handle it before you are allowed to have a licence.

"Everybody says the Government should do this, and the Government should do that, and yes, we should - but if somebody leaves their brain on the footpath when they get in a car, then frankly they will put their own lives at risk and those who are travelling with them," he said.

Thats probably the most sensible comment i have heard from any of them in a long time. Too many people think they are good drivers when some of them probably shouldnt have passed the prac exam in the first place.

I really dont care what they do, double demerits, increase fines, impound vehicles, i just sit on the highway with the cruise control on, give people plenty of room and go about my business.

[Mechan1k]

Look ... road tolls about 10 years ago were 10 times higher than we have today.
So people erally should complain though.
I think it is lower now though as the "Road Toll death rate" category changed to something along the line of "If the person in the accident dies more than 24 hours after the actual accident ... they are not classed as part of the Road Toll death rate during holiday periods".

[MO]

Driver training and education, these things if done properly will help to reduce accidents.

[deesun]

It is entirely possible but not necesarily likely that the QLD government has the knowledge of the other states mistakes and could actually come up with some decent ideas without a kneejerk reaction,but I'm not holding my breath.

[Keepleft]

It takes more than a one liner to improve things though, talk is cheap. It is my experience that some of our domestic natural born "experts" are not at all impressed with say German government 'acceptance of speed as a given' where they work with it to 'seperate' traffic. Rather than here in AUS which sees our academics work 'against' speed through the use of cameras and the like to effectively help 'bunch-up' traffic, and to then move that traffic along in 'blocks', or 'trains' for management. Some of our experts would like to remove the seriousness of the keep left (multi lane) rule to help aid in that.

A few things that need to happen:-

* Further hamonising ADR's with the World Standards and 'Policy' administered by UNECE, and which are increasingly accepted by the North American market as partners.

This would see a mandatory ADR52-rear fogs, ECE38-triangle, safety vest/shirt and ongoing vehicle technical updates as technology improves, the latter is a function right now, Australia is a contracting party to the Global Technical Regulations for Vehicles, we have been contracting with them the UN/ECE) since 1998, and have worked with them since much earlier in time -1974.

* Driver education with an emphasis on 'defensive', rather than 'advanced' (there is little evidence advanced driver training has helped, there is some evidence however such programs have caused more crash involvement owing over-confidence on part of the pupil), but the federal 'defensive' driving component includes actual on-road training, braking, scanning, steering and control, with a defensive outlook in that.

This Commonwealth initiated National Driver Training Scheme is starting this year as a trial, it begins with its first candidate pupils from participating Victoria and NSW. If the EU-Swede sourced program is successful in these two jurisdictions, the program would then become a national scheme. A reason why you now see SA, QLD and VIC study the NSW graduated system for adoption, which in turn would be modified to further improve training as required under the trial as this study process continues.

A State can help push certain road-safety items along. WA parliament for instance first mandated engine immobilizers - which then forced DOTARS to hurry up an ADR adoption on the matter.

QLD for example could mandate say the UNECE triangle for registration in that state perhaps with a one-off $13 rebate off registration to help people buy the item, thereby effectively forcing federal moves at a later stage to either create the necessary ARR modification through the inter-governmental ARR relationship, or create an actual ADR on the matter overriding the AS3790, or toughen up AS3790. It all depends if the State has the balls and brains to do so, often their public servant agencies will say 'gee, we only had one person killed standaing behind a car last year, thinking that is the only reason why you'd ever mandate, it certainly not, but..., Or they could just install more speed cameras which is what we might cynically expect.

Road Design Guidelines/National Standard metrology must begin to improve, an Ausroads area. We have seen the recent M7 fatal, which potentially highlights an issue with 'standards' in relation to barrier-interlacing, that is, where one barrier cannot perform properly when it is installed 'sheer' up against another, or alongside if you will, here additional deflection space for wire-rope is likely required where it interlaces.

And so it goes, for my part over the years I've had all state handbooks mention to "switch off the ignition of crashed immobilized vehicles to reduce risk of fire", to "immediately switch on hazard-warning lights of the crashed or broken-down vehicle and those undamaged", to set a triangle and for those attending to throw on a safety vest to aid in the person pedestrian safety. These are items and actions which must be mandated as part of an overall process targeting even greater advancement change.

Some time ago I upset then NRTC for drafting a modification to the existing ARR requirements in relation to warning triangle placement and carriage requirement of three units which currently applies to vehicles with over 12 tonnes GVM.

My modification added additional rules effectively mandating a single UNECE27 triangle, the Euro type for certain categories of vehicle, car, van and 4WD and I used ADR vehicle terminology for this, example MA=passenger vehicles. In this draft, I set out placement requirements and the like - but which also had an opt-out rule if the person was unfit or the scene was simply too dangerous.

One government feedback was "You mandate the triangle carriage requirement but have not mandated placement". The writer thought this odd. I had drafted in the Rule the European driver training practice of having folk "hold the triangle facing traffic when setting off to place it, and when returning it to storage, to aid in the persons pedestrian safety".

I guess Aussie wasn't quite ready for this terrifying European learner driver stuff just yet. Preferring more speed cameras and reduced speed limits.

[Keepleft]

FLAPPIST - Your Frazer Island comments have a parallel situation in NT, where the NT Government has had a long recognised issue with overseas tourists who do not comprehend fatigue and distance the way we do here, and that some of them have a habit of treating the rural NT roads as having the uniform quality of an autobahn, they lack understanding in relation wandering stock and to Aussie wildlife and its activity and potential damage that can result.

These issues can be targetted through campaigns in-flight, and in foreign markets via press etc.

Your Frazer example is somewhat of a cop-out on part of the government, but might be ‘insurance' concern based (or 'organised' business opposition). Again and regardless, this too can be ‘fixed’.

[Aaron_EF8]

Look ... road tolls about 10 years ago were 10 times higher than we have today.

What are you talking about?

Road tolls were at their highest in the early 70's, and were around double of the 2004 road toll.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@....a?OpenDocument

[Psycho Chicken]

And what safety features have we added since the early 70's?

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Psycho Chicken

And what safety features have we added since the early 70's?

Your probaly thinking since AUS mandated seatblets AND regulated their wearing, along those lines, well. . . .

Insofar as vehicle construction requirements AND equipment supply requirements, HEAPS - as technology and regulatory demand creates change.

Everything from laminated windscreens to improved lighting, anti-burst door locks, side-intrusion beams etc.

The improvement in Global Technical Regulations, and their ongoing development, are the major reason why folk are less maimed and killed in cars than say 36 years ago.

Furthering improvement is ongoing driver education, and that some governments and agencies work with human nature, or the human being, rather than against.

A small example here that I hope will further improvement; It is Australia's newly developing Commonwealth National Driver Training Scheme that is intending to 'weed out' the crazies and immature, with a view of then seriously helping the identified person along, and to not let them fall behind or be left out.

[FordFan86]

Sweeet Mary.. won't someone think of the warning triangles!??!

[Blue Oval Mopar Man]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

It takes more than a one liner to improve things though, talk is cheap. It is my experience that some of our domestic natural born "experts" are not at all impressed with say German government 'acceptance of speed as a given' where they work with it to 'seperate' traffic. Rather than here in AUS which sees our academics work 'against' speed through the use of cameras and the like to effectively help 'bunch-up' traffic, and to then move that traffic along in 'blocks', or 'trains' for management. Some of our experts would like to remove the seriousness of the keep left (multi lane) rule to help aid in that.

A few things that need to happen:-

* Further hamonising ADR's with the World Standards and 'Policy' administered by UNECE, and which are increasingly accepted by the North American market as partners.

This would see a mandatory ADR52-rear fogs, ECE38-triangle, safety vest/shirt and ongoing vehicle technical updates as technology improves, the latter is a function right now, Australia is a contracting party to the Global Technical Regulations for Vehicles, we have been contracting with them the UN/ECE) since 1998, and have worked with them since much earlier in time -1974.

* Driver education with an emphasis on 'defensive', rather than 'advanced' (there is little evidence advanced driver training has helped, there is some evidence however such programs have caused more crash involvement owing over-confidence on part of the pupil), but the federal 'defensive' driving component includes actual on-road training, braking, scanning, steering and control, with a defensive outlook in that.

This Commonwealth initiated National Driver Training Scheme is starting this year as a trial, it begins with its first candidate pupils from participating Victoria and NSW. If the EU-Swede sourced program is successful in these two jurisdictions, the program would then become a national scheme. A reason why you now see SA, QLD and VIC study the NSW graduated system for adoption, which in turn would be modified to further improve training as required under the trial as this study process continues.

A State can help push certain road-safety items along. WA parliament for instance first mandated engine immobilizers - which then forced DOTARS to hurry up an ADR adoption on the matter.

QLD for example could mandate say the UNECE triangle for registration in that state perhaps with a one-off $13 rebate off registration to help people buy the item, thereby effectively forcing federal moves at a later stage to either create the necessary ARR modification through the inter-governmental ARR relationship, or create an actual ADR on the matter overriding the AS3790, or toughen up AS3790. It all depends if the State has the balls and brains to do so, often their public servant agencies will say 'gee, we only had one person killed standaing behind a car last year, thinking that is the only reason why you'd ever mandate, it certainly not, but..., Or they could just install more speed cameras which is what we might cynically expect.

Road Design Guidelines/National Standard metrology must begin to improve, an Ausroads area. We have seen the recent M7 fatal, which potentially highlights an issue with 'standards' in relation to barrier-interlacing, that is, where one barrier cannot perform properly when it is installed 'sheer' up against another, or alongside if you will, here additional deflection space for wire-rope is likely required where it interlaces.

And so it goes, for my part over the years I've had all state handbooks mention to "switch off the ignition of crashed immobilized vehicles to reduce risk of fire", to "immediately switch on hazard-warning lights of the crashed or broken-down vehicle and those undamaged", to set a triangle and for those attending to throw on a safety vest to aid in the person pedestrian safety. These are items and actions which must be mandated as part of an overall process targeting even greater advancement change.

Some time ago I upset then NRTC for drafting a modification to the existing ARR requirements in relation to warning triangle placement and carriage requirement of three units which currently applies to vehicles with over 12 tonnes GVM.

My modification added additional rules effectively mandating a single UNECE27 triangle, the Euro type for certain categories of vehicle, car, van and 4WD and I used ADR vehicle terminology for this, example MA=passenger vehicles. In this draft, I set out placement requirements and the like - but which also had an opt-out rule if the person was unfit or the scene was simply too dangerous.

One government feedback was "You mandate the triangle carriage requirement but have not mandated placement". The writer thought this odd. I had drafted in the Rule the European driver training practice of having folk "hold the triangle facing traffic when setting off to place it, and when returning it to storage, to aid in the persons pedestrian safety".

I guess Aussie wasn't quite ready for this terrifying European learner driver stuff just yet. Preferring more speed cameras and reduced speed limits.

KEEP LEFT, are you harold scrubby ?????? I think you are ! How the hell is a stupid triangle going to stop the stupid people driving cars when they obviously lack the common sense or ability to do so safely ! You could put 1000 triangles in each car and it would do squat to the road toll ! Give it a rest !

[Keepleft]

Blue Oval - understand this very well, I am not Harold Scruby.

My triangle move is one very very small step in many larger being undertaken over the next few years to improve our position, understand?

Your dead wrong in your assertion. The move prevents crashes in the first place and reduces secondary crashes, it really is extremely simple, the lesson for this is already understood, particularly overseas and here in relation to trucks over 12 tonnes GVM.

If you'd really like to discuss those other moves, then the forum had better double its capacity:-)

[MightyXR6Turbo]

Yeah, I think the triangle thing is a little off beat, yeah its a safety thing, but why don't we just use the Hazard lights that all cars are equiped with, it is surely a better method because its illuminated, and flashes and gets the attention of drivers.

As for the rear fog lights, you really can't be serious can you?! There are very, very little places in Australia where the use of them is not required, infact it is just blatantly annoying, and you can receive a defect for using them because they "Dazzle Drivers". In Adelaide for instance, it is completely useless unless you are travelling in the hills constantly, but we rarely get any fog! They are a nuisence since people just leave them on at night, they are too bright for tail lights and cause a distraction to the drivers following them!

[MightyXR6Turbo]

Oops this sentance:

There are very, very little places in Australia where the use of them is not required

Should read:
"There are very, very little places in Australia where the use of them is required"

[XD 351 Ute]

Hmmm, more people, more cars, more people in cars, more idiots on the road, more people dead.

Sadly I think that sums it up............

Not only is education required, but better roads, etc to match our newer, better designed cars.

The first and simplest rule of driving, is drive to the conditons, be they traffic, road, weather or whatever.

Of course all the ranting in the world will never stop those who are a rule unto their own, will it??

Not even when they take out the innocent.

Ed

[MO]

Keepleft you are SSOOOO wrong you have got yourself caught up in your own web ....you really want to reduce prangs and safety at prangs.....1) proper driver training and education,this will involve defensive and offensive car control..ie a small but helpfull component could be motorkhana work...track work..skid pan..oil or water based..as a backup take them to the local morgue.

2) Forget your triangles, rather turn them into flares.

3) The biggest factor that has to be overcome ......is the I'm invincible and ohh so good,when we get the education of attitude right then the training will follow.

I'm going to hazard a guess here but here goes my driver training initially was learn the rules park the car,heres your licence....then some years later I joined a car club...started doing motorkhanas,trackwork,hillclimbs etc,etc...and learned a whole lot more two driver courses I have done were the ACT police driver training and the NT police driver training and as I have found even they are lacking.

Now would you care to post your driver training history...because I think that you maybe lacking in some areas....just to add to my record...I drove 20/30 ton fire trucks for a living and was asked to drive Ambulances if needed from incidents to hospital.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by John McMaster

Keepleft you are SSOOOO wrong you have got yourself caught up in your own web ....you really want to reduce prangs and safety at prangs.....1) proper driver training and education,this will involve defensive and offensive car control..ie a small but helpfull component could be motorkhana work...track work..skid pan..oil or water based..as a backup take them to the local morgue.

Yeah yeah heard it all before, *will not* happen, we cannot afford it and the program such that you advocate cannot be implemented nationwide. You might at most get it in Sydney, but thats about it. That said I am aware that driver education is critical, Lord, read what is said in your driver manual under 'what to do at a crash scene", if you not happy, come and see me.

Think government and private 'adminstration' and if you can show me a workable cost benefit analysis, then I'll support you. The last safety venture I attended was one of those Community get togethers, Mingara where the Club put on a P Plate forum. An ambulance and VRA staff had what they called 'graphic' videos to show to impress the young. The Police (Lawson) admitted to have run out of ideas.

Basically all this fest of experts achieved was for a few young women, six or so, to leave the forum to go outside in tears. For my part I see far more graphic footage of human meat everday via my C band satellite TV news coverage, that, and I've spent my life in a judicial family viewing coronial images etc and so on. one young lady told me "I came here hoping to find some actual advice about driving, but all I got was this video showing a young male teenager dead". Seems typical. An utter waste of time.

If NSW Constable, you wish to discuss cross party govermental safety strategies, then I'll put you in touch with those whom I deal, including some of your own, then I'll make sure your invited to talk before Staysafe or perhaps a Regulation Review Committee where you can better our on road position.


2) Forget your triangles, rather turn them into flares.

Sweet bloody Jesus, another yank?? Flares do not form part of the world harmonisation project so contracted by the majority of countries, they were dropped from suggestion years ago for various reasons, but remain optional Stateside, where they will stay optional, though the warning triangle remains 'suggested' in that market. That triangle standard btw is copied into our AS3790m so adopted by yank leaning domestic expert high on mad cow disease I am certain. Nothing like organising second best. The yank item is crap - pure and simple.


3) The biggest factor that has to be overcome ......is the I'm invincible and ohh so good,when we get the education of attitude right then the training will follow.

How many times does this have to be highlighted in forum? Again, the Commonwealth initiated National Driver Training Scheme WILL TARGET this category of driver with early intervention. The first participating pupils will be selected early this year-2006. The program is a 3 year trial, its emphasis is 'defensive' driving, its source expertise is EU (Sweden) and involves naturally AUS based expert personnel. States involved VIC & NSW. I am optomistic that for the first time in Australian history we are actually about to start a program that should work and that owing ANDERSON and LOYD input does include on-road training. We will NOT teach people to rally or motor race, sorry.


I'm going to hazard a guess here but here goes my driver training initially was learn the rules park the car, heres your licence....

Your guessing as at your initial training?



then some years later I joined a car club

Joined an RSL myself.

...started doing motorkhanas, trackwork, hillclimbs etc,etc...and learned a whole lot more two driver courses I have done were the ACT police driver training and the NT police driver training and as I have found even they are lacking.

Rallying myself, starting Port Moresby dating back to 1979. I can tell you that this plays no part whatsoever in my evil plans to improve our lot on 'public' roads, any drunken chimpanzee can do this childs stuff, and in any case, there is evidence that advanced driver training candidates have a higher crash rate than those who have not done such a course, which is why administrators now concentrate on 'defensive' driving. I am far more interested in vehicle standards, design rules and driver behaviour as in the behavioural sciences and how best we implement programs and change.

Now, if you mean to impress me with NT, NSW Police driver training (once held at St Ives?), or Ambulance or Fire brigade driving duties and that somehow I should be in awe of this 'ability'???? I can assure you I am absolutely not, your training is akin to a third level German learner, number three car I attended in the 1986 F3 fog crash involving 80 odd cars was a serving police Inspector, nope don't impress me much, not helped by the following dumbarse suggestion that resulted in our being allowed to use hazard warning lights in fog, owing the sheer police ignorance of ADR 52.

My brother is a Fire Captain locally and Chopper Paramedic,my family members are HWP and legal staff. I've heard all the stories and seen most of the ИИИИ. I do deal with each agency you mention either as a nag, or at crash-scenes, often if and when as required or desired on my part.

I simply do not get a hard-on over emergency services, sorry. Do *not* take this to mean I wouldn't support the organisations or their individuals politically, and be aware I have advocated certain police equipment items, and my family support NSW Police Association members.


Now would you care to post your driver training history...because I think that you maybe lacking in some areas....

Fair enough in your opinion, my dogged efforts here in forum, its a Ford forum afterall - as you can see concern primarily one single item of very many more that I have been involved in for a thousand years or so it would seem. Kindly, do not assume that in thought that I'm one tracked in advocacy. See the newsgroup 'aus.cars' for more serious discussion on my part. Change takes time.

Now, certainly, I DO rely on expert experience be that engineering or other, typically in order to create change where that is recognised, or if I can see another way to achieve a desired outcome OR position. Now, if an agency thinks I'm out of touch with a submisson or in a discussion, they usually tell me, if I then have to clarify something, I will. Its taken a few years of effort to get certain emergency scene texts included in all state driver handbooks, the type you read now, and with almost no thanks to the agencies who in thier collective negligence failed to do so until 5 - 7 years ago. I am telling you things are improving, and those improvements do sadly take time. If I had total carte blanche them well!! My scribblings appear in Australia, PNG and the USA.

just to add to my record...I drove 20/30 ton fire trucks for a living and was asked to drive Ambulances if needed from incidents to hospital.

You got me, only driven an Army Blitz myself.

Now, with all this expertise, why did you not speak in Canberra December 15, 2004? Where we could then have talked. If you were there you should have spoken, this would have been good.

One of my other activities is to source funds, for road building projects or to have certain road works carried out, this does not involve driver training or triangles, but can, sometimes, involve legal matters.

[Blue Oval Mopar Man]

Originally Posted by John McMaster

Keepleft you are SSOOOO wrong you have got yourself caught up in your own web ....you really want to reduce prangs and safety at prangs.....1) proper driver training and education,this will involve defensive and offensive car control..ie a small but helpfull component could be motorkhana work...track work..skid pan..oil or water based..as a backup take them to the local morgue.

2) Forget your triangles, rather turn them into flares.

3) The biggest factor that has to be overcome ......is the I'm invincible and ohh so good,when we get the education of attitude right then the training will follow.

I'm going to hazard a guess here but here goes my driver training initially was learn the rules park the car,heres your licence....then some years later I joined a car club...started doing motorkhanas,trackwork,hillclimbs etc,etc...and learned a whole lot more two driver courses I have done were the ACT police driver training and the NT police driver training and as I have found even they are lacking.

Now would you care to post your driver training history...because I think that you maybe lacking in some areas....just to add to my record...I drove 20/30 ton fire trucks for a living and was asked to drive Ambulances if needed from incidents to hospital.

I agree with your whole heartedly on those points John! Although I beleive the triangles ARE a good saftey measure , I have seen instances where even my towtruck flashing lights werenot enough to prevent braindead drivers from adding to the carnage ! thankfully blind luck intervened and the fool was pulled over and booked for endagering the lives of people at a crash scene!

I too have completed the ACT driver training as well as various RAAF driver training courses and compete in motor racing ! So I do know a little on the subject as well!

[Keepleft]

Blue Oval - are you old like me? Ever serve or reside at RAAF Butterworth?


In any case folks - the working year starts, today.

[MO]

Keepleft now I have a better understanding of where you're coming from...good luck.

As for the Canberra thing I was busy building a house...besides did'nt know it was on.

Blue oval thanks for support.

Keepleft am ex RAAF also..1966/72.

[deesun]

Damn, I don't want another post as long as KEEPLEFTs second last one again. I can't imagine anyone thinking he is Harrold the Dunce : because he knew too much,didn't bash 4x4s, never mentioned a bullbar nor speeding and didn't seem hellbent on everyone driving @ 30kph on freeways but the triangle thing although a little anoying : hearing it time and time again certainly has its merits. I will assume that KEEPLEFT is actively pushing for the mandating of triangles in every car as standard equipment and for registration purposes as well as the use of same. Keepup the good work KEEPLEFT you add to the entertainment and learning : value of this fine forum.